Discovery Institute Has Put Over $4 Million Towards Scientific and Academic Research into Evolution and Intelligent Design in the Past Decade

Discovery Institute launched the Center for Science and Culture in 1996, recognizing the need for an institutional home for the emerging scientific theory of intelligent design. Even though the nascent theory of intelligent design was already being discussed by individual scientists around the world, it was not until the Center for Science and Culture was established that scientists were given the resources to research what has become the most exciting scientific story since the Big Bang.

The Center provides funding and support for scientists and scholars whose research challenges various aspects of neo-Darwinian theory and develops the scientific theory known as intelligent design. Saturday, October 21st, the Institute will host a ten year anniversary dinner to honor the achievements of the Center for Science & Culture, along with its Fellows and staff.

“In 1996, it was almost impossible to receive funding to do scientific research related to intelligent design,” says Bruce Chapman, President of Discovery Institute. “And, in addition to a lack of funding and resources, it was clear that scientists working on intelligent design were facing more and more persecution and harassment, making it difficult for them to conduct research.”

“So we started the Center, and now, just ten years later, we’ve put over $4 million directly into scientific and scholarly research on intelligent design and evolution.”

In the last ten years the CSC has:

* Supported research and writing by more than 50 scientists and scholars in the sciences, social sciences and humanities. * Supported scientists and philosophers of science working on specific journal articles, monographs, and books in such areas as biology, biochemistry, cosmology, physics, probability theory, philosophy of mind, and philosophy of science. * Financially supported a number of scientific and academic conferences, including the International Symposium on the Origins of Animal Body Plans in Chengjiang, China, the Nature of Nature conference at Baylor University, and and intelligent design conference at Yale University.

The dinner is open to the public, and the cost to attend is $100 per person. Anyone interested in attending can register online at the Discovery Institute website at www.discovery.org. For more information, contact event coordinator Annelise Davis at (206) 292-0401 x153.

I doubt that the research that produced Nobel prizes in Chemistry and Medicine/Physiology cost $4 million combined. I don't really know for sure, but some of the most fundamental discoveries cost quite little to make.I point this out only because the DI's "Mr. Suave" aka Rob Crowther, is bragging that the "Discovery Institute Has Put Over $4 Million Towards Scientific and Academic Research into Evolution and Intelligent Design in the Past Decade":

Quote

“In 1996, it was almost impossible to receive funding to do scientific research related to intelligent design,” says Bruce Chapman, President of Discovery Institute.…

“So we started the Center, and now, just ten years later, we’ve put over $4 million directly into scientific and scholarly research on intelligent design and evolution.”

And what did that $4 million buy them? No original research. They still lack a theory of ID, so whether or not you have funding, it remains impossible to actually do research on ID.

Yes, that money has bought them conferences, and has paid for books to be published. But if the NSF spent $4 million on a research program that had as little to show for it as the DI can show for their money, Congress would be holding serious hearings into that mismanagement of funds.

Odd that the DI would be bragging about this.

Incidentally, their recent PR blitz on this point, especially tacked onto an ad for a $100 a plate dinner, suggests that the DI's failures in court and lab are hurting their bottom line. Tack on the recently created "Discovery Society" another effort to extract cash from gullible IDolators, and it's hard to come to any other conclusion.

Discovery Institute Has Put Over $4 Million Towards Scientific and Academic Research into Evolution and Intelligent Design in the Past Decade

I am confused. I thought ID research was crippled because they couldn't get funds. Where could I have gotten that idea from?

--------------It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it. We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

Discovery Institute Has Put Over $4 Million Towards Scientific and Academic Research into Evolution and Intelligent Design in the Past Decade

I am confused. I thought ID research was crippled because they couldn't get funds. Where could I have gotten that idea from?

ID is funded just like real science, and at the same time ID can't get funding. ID produces lots of research but at the same time it's unfair to expect them to produce research. ID researchers are persecuted and harassed, and at the same time they have Darwinism 'on the run'. Darwinists are a mafia of atheist materialists who ruthlessly suppress dissent throughout science, and Darwinism is also 'practically dead'. ID produces all kinds of publications, and at the same time can't get their research published because of persecution by Darwinists. ID has nothing to do with religion, but at the same time it is the Logos theology of John's Gospel restated in the idiom of information theory. IDists believe that the earth is 6,000 years old and that it is 4.5 billion years old. IDists believe that evolution happened, that it never happened, and that it once happened but no longer does.

Oh yes, and we've always been at war with Eurasia.

--------------"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

If a living system looks well designed, it's evidence for ID. If it looks poorly designed, that's just because we have no way of knowing what constitutes good and bad design.

If something is well designed, God, erm, I mean the Disembodied Designer obviously did that. I mean, it's just obvious.

But it's completely invalid to claim that something was poorly designed, since that's claiming to be able to know what God's the DD's motives are. That's theology. We don't do that.

--------------"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

I think we should take up a collection to send JanieBelle and Corporal Kate to the DI /CSC dinner. What a hoot that would be! I'm good for $20.

Janie and Kate would go "all breezy" under their dresses (we guys know this as going commando) and flashing Bill Dembski.

Jonathan Wells would come on to Janie, and Kate would probably whack 'em upside his head. There might wind up being a naked jello cat fight somewhere along the line. MorphoDyke Denyse would definitely be targeted with a large raw fish from the kitchen.

DaveScot would wind up being tied to a chair where he'd be videotaped and forced to tell his mama he was a homo.

Then they'd have to kick the girls out. Janie would leave peacefully but it'd take 3-4 security personnel to expel Kate. She doesn't really take crap from anybody.

--------------Lou FCD is still in school, so we should only count him as a baby biologist. -carlsonjok -deprecatedI think I might love you. Don't tell Deadman -Wolfhound

Denyse would definitely be targeted with a large raw fish from the kitchen.

??

I thought Densye WAS a large raw fish from the kitchen.

Ouch.

--------------"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

You know how, when put on the spot, the DI tells school boards and legislators that, no, they aren't arguing to have "intelligent design" arguments inserted into the schools? The DI's "Academic Freedom Day" website shows that they really, really haven't been telling the truth.

Why does the 'Academic Freedom Day' logo show people shooting rubber chickens from behind an American flag while Darwin looks on with dismay, armed only with a large, phallic pencil?

And why are there 160 stars on the American Flag?

Is the DI counting our newest states... like Iraq? Gaza?

I for one would welcome the fair, balanced and open dialogue between, Dembski, Lusin and Muqtadr al Sadr...as they discuss Allah The Designer.

Now THAT my friends would be a movie worth watching :)

added in edit: OOOPS! I have to offer an apology!

It seems Muqtadr LOVES this site, (I think he has a crush on Kristine) and sent me a PM - He says he wants NOTHING to do wit the DI - He strongly stressed that there are some things that even half-crazed mullahs have to draw the line at - and the DI is the line in the sand for the Muq Man.

However, he did say his cousin, Muqtardr , al Sadr is always going on and on about how he sees Allah in camel dung droppings. Even written a couple books, called No Free Camels, and On The Edge Of a Camel.

--------------Come on Tough Guy, do the little dance of ID impotence you do so well. - Louis to Joe G 2/10

Gullibility is not a virtue - Quidam on Dembski's belief in the Bible Code Faith Healers & ID 7/08

The rules approved by the BESE effectuate the academic freedom bill’s purpose to allow teachers to use supplementary materials to teach controversial scientific theories without threat of recrimination.

A subcommittee of the Board removed a provision prohibiting intelligent design before passing the rules unanimously. The legally redundant provision would have gone beyond the intent of the legislation and was dropped after the subcommittee heard testimony from supporters and opponents of the language.

In adopting these rules, the BESE reiterated its support for academic freedom for teachers to teach controversial scientific theories.

According to Discovery Institute education policy analyst Casey Luskin, “This is another victory for Louisiana students and teachers to have a climate of academic freedom to learn about scientific controversies over evolution and other topics in the curriculum.”

The rules approved by the BESE effectuate the academic freedom bill’s purpose to allow teachers to use supplementary materials to teach controversial scientific theories without threat of recrimination.

A subcommittee of the Board removed a provision prohibiting intelligent design before passing the rules unanimously. The legally redundant provision would have gone beyond the intent of the legislation and was dropped after the subcommittee heard testimony from supporters and opponents of the language.

In adopting these rules, the BESE reiterated its support for academic freedom for teachers to teach controversial scientific theories.

According to Discovery Institute education policy analyst Casey Luskin, “This is another victory for Louisiana students and teachers to have a climate of academic freedom to learn about scientific controversies over evolution and other topics in the curriculum.”

So the state board used this as an occasion to remove a restriction that the state board rules previously held against teaching intelligent design.